Annual report

DOCUMENTS DEPT.
SAN FRANCISCO
PUBLIC LIBRARY

5/S

o

San Francisco Public Library

Government Information Center

San Francisco Public Library

100 Larkin Street, 5 h Floor

San Francisco, CA 94102

REFERENCE BOOK
Not in be taken lr,im the library

DOCUMENTS DEPARTMENT "

3 1223 901 87 "4868

ililiBwiii,,,,,. Jm S ° 7978

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2012 with funding from

California State Library Califa/LSTA Grant

http://archive.org/details/5annualreport1963sanf

w

f&

x&

^s

ifr*

&f>

f

11

w

n

'San Francisco
1

/

Agency
Annual
Report

o

The cover photograph

taken by Karl H. Rick at the

Redevelopment Agency's pilot

moderate-priced private housing

evelopment at St. Francis Square in

Western Addition Area 1 indicates

one of the many environments

created out of blighted areas

through the redevelopment process.

Sponsor: ILWU Longshoremen's

Redevelopment Corporation.

Architects:

Marquis and Stoller, AIA.

San Francisco

Introduction

The San Francisco Redevelopment Program:

Balancing the supply of housing

Opportunities (or social advancement with rehousing

Increasing minority opportunities

Investment, jobs, taxes

Preservation ol views and open spaces

Development of entertainment and cultural
facilities

Achieving outstanding design

Preservation of outstanding structures
of the past

Community and neighborhood facilities

Citizen participation

Report on Projects and Studies

Western Addition Area 1

Diamond Heights

Golden Gateway

Western Addition Area 2

Verba Buena Center

Hunters Point

Rapid Transit Corridor Study

Projected Expenditures and Project Financing

The year 1963 was one of realization in San
Francisco's redevelopment. New office buildings
were occupied. Families moved into their new
homes— quality-designed and in moderate,
medium, and upper price brackets. Lawns and
trees were growing in the designated green
areas. Heavy traffic flowed swiftly along major
arterials, and light traffic moved slowly in resi-
dential sections. "Projects" disappeared and the
re-established areas began to merge into a new
and higher level of city life.

Blight has been removed, better rehousing pro-
vided, and businesses successfully re-estab-
lished.

With the emergence of such evidences of suc-
cessful redevelopment came an awareness of
the complexities of the redevelopment process.
Legislation, financing, organization, planning,
citizen participation and consultation, coordina-
tion of many interests, use of the highest public
and private skills, inquiry and challenge, high
standards of design and development— all these
and more were reflected in the final product.

This experience sharpened the imagination and
the demands of San Francisco citizens. Most
want more of the same (although some want
less!). Some citizens want to place greater em-
phasis on certain aspects than on others. Such
reactions are good: they keep the program sen-
sitive to the community's needs.

Every San Francisco citizen should ask himself
how he wants his City to develop or redevelop
in the future. Does he like these trends? These
facilities? These homes? Does he want more
emphasis on some aspects than on others? Does
he know why he gets such results? Is he pre-
pared to endorse measures which may be nec-
essary to make desired adjustments possible?
Is he willing to admit that he cannot have all of
the developments he wants because his fellow
citizens have conflicting preferences?

Many elements enter into the answers to these
questions. Redevelopment does not proceed in
a vacuum. It is part of the City. It proceeds only
under the policy direction of the Board of Super-
visors and the Mayor. Its operations are inte-
grated with those of the Office of the Controller,
the Department of City Planning, the Depart-
ment of Public Works, and others. Scarcely a
City department is not a participant in the
redevelopment process, and each has its own
mission to carry out.

The Agency's cash financing is essentially Fed-
eral, but City public works and commitments in
projects require City cash expenditures too.
Long-range planning of financing to avoid sud-
den financial crises and rapid disposition of offi-
cial actions needed are important to the delivery
of a program on an effective and efficient basis.

Not only the citizenry and the official agencies
of government shape the program, but private
business does as well. Once sites are sold for
private development, it is the skills, capacities,
and efforts brought out by our free enterprise
system which take us to the realization of the
entire complex product of redevelopment.

The answers to the questions posed in this
report are not rendered by any one body. Yet
experience tells us that the answers given by
public bodies whose decisions guide the redevel-
opment process are in the last analysis shaped
by the understanding, demands, and reactions
of San Francisco citizens. Pages 1 through 13
suggest a background for evaluation of and
reaction to San Francisco's redevelopment pro-
gram.

These pages are followed by a section which
highlights progress made in the 1963 calendar
year within each of the Agency's projects.

me supply

How is San Francisco's redevelopment program
being used to balance tbe supply of private
housing?

By using the aids made available by the Federal
Housing Act of 1961, the Redevelopment Agency
has been able to make possible the construction
of housing in a wide range of prices. The St
Francis Square Cooperative Apartments, com-
pleted in the first Western Addition area in
1963, provided 299 homes ranging in monthly
charges from $84 for a one-bedroom unit to
$140 for a unit with three bedrooms. These
monthly costs include utilities, taxes, repairs,
all outside maintenance of the buildings and
grounds, interest, and a payment toward equity
in the stock ownership of the development.

Plans and technical measures were advanced for
the construction of 471 units of moderate priced
private housing in Diamond Heights.* It is esti-
mated that monthly carrying charges will run
from $100 a month for a one-bedroom unit to
$159 for a four-bedroom unit. This housing will
be privately built privately owned, and privately
maintained and managed. It will be built in com
plete compliance with the City's building codes
and according to outstanding designs selected
from a design competition. Mortgage funds at
low interest and appropriate pricing of land will
be key factors in keeping costs down.

In addition to the units which were built in the
first Western Addition area and the units to be

built in Diamond Heights, the Agency has estab-
lished as a program objective the construction
of an additional 1,400 such units in Western
Addition Area 2. Hunters Point with planning
scheduled to begin in 1964, will be redeveloped
predominantly for moderate-priced private nous
ing, providing an estimated 1,700 additional
such homes.

A technique has evolved for the private building
of well-designed, quality homes through the use
of design competitions, adjusted land prices,
and low interest mortgage funds. There is much
progress. To have more progress in the direc-
tion of lower cost private housing, there must
be attention paid to the other major components
of costs: materials, methods, codes, mainte-
nance, and taxes

* TM toi/d el Suptrvitsri tpprortd the nrcfuini Rtdirtl-
■ pmtnt Plan chanfit et Jftnuiry 20, 1M4.

2

3

Did
SI. Francis
Square „
lust happen r

The Redevelopment Agency in

the first six months of its land

marketing program set aside

three blocks for an experiment

in getting moderate-priced

private housing built.

Six proposals were received.

The Agency picked the one
resulting in St. Francis Square.

Subsequently the passage of

Federal legislation making

low-interest mortgage funds

available enabled the sponsors

to stay within their original

cost projections.

Sponsor: ilwu Longshoremen's

Redevelopment Corporation.

Architects:

Marquis and Stoller, AIA.

Photo: Karl H. Riek

opportunities lor
social advancement

Does San Francisco use its redevelopment pro-
gram not only as an opportunity for rehousing
but also as an opportunity for social advance-
ment for the families and individuals affected?

The Agency fully recognizes its legal responsi-
bility to those most inconvenienced by redevel-
opment and takes a positive position regarding
its moral obligations. Although the proper re-
housing of the families and individuals is the
principal responsibility of the Agency, it uses
the relocation process as an opportunity for
social betterment. The relocation staff's con-
tacts with families present the occasion for the
identification of numerous problems which are
barriers to securing and maintaining satisfac-
tory housing. The Agency uses these contacts as
the opportunity to advise or to refer families
and individuals to appropriate community or-
ganizations for such services as vocational and
adult education, job training, employment op-
portunities, health clinics, family counseling,
homemaking, and visiting nurse services.

A program has been developed with the San
Francisco Unified School District for teaching
homemaking skills. Residents receive individual
and group instruction in budgeting, meal plan-
ning, housekeeping, and home furnishing.

The Agency has initiated or helped in obtaining
demonstration programs to experiment with new
methods that aid the rehousing process:

A Federal grant to the San Francisco Devel-
opment Fund to provide rental subsidies and
such services as required to enable 60 low-
income families to achieve home ownership.

A Ford Foundation grant to the San Francisco
Council of Churches to provide special relo-
cation and social assistance to elderly
persons.

A grant by the Sears Roebuck Foundation for
a homemaking program under the auspices
of the San Francisco Unified School District.

A finder's fee program under which a pay-
ment is made to any landlord or agent who
will make units available to families to be
relocated by the Agency.

The Agency recognizes that, notwithstanding
the great benefits of redevelopment, there are
limitations under present laws. The process en-
tails inconveniences for some of San Francisco's
citizens in redevelopment areas. This explains
the Agency's long, continuing work to develop
new methods in rehousing and social services
and thereby to turn inconveniences to signifi-
cant gains for these citizens.

Rehousing ol families in

western Addition Area 1

ol all known lamilies in the
Agency's workload moved into
better housing ■

ol all known families in the
Agency's workload moved into
standard housing •*

* Source Wallace f Smith, "Relocation In Son francnco,"
Bit Art* Roll CltJtO Report fourth quarter. I960
"Source: San Irancnco Herjr erlopmrnt Afrncf llfuTOI
'audited be the Homing and Homo Flnanco Agoncy).

What is disturbing to me is the opportunity
missed by communities to seize this moment of
relocation to bring about the social rehabilita-
tion of the family. For it is just at the moment
that a family has been uprooted, has been pro-
vided through relocation with the means of es-
tablishing a new home, and has been brought
into contact— some for the first time and many
for re-acquaintance— with the social agencies
of the community, that miracles can be accom-
plished.

Dr. Robert C. Weaver, Administrator
Housing and Home Finance Agency

4

5

Photo: San Francisco Examiner

The story ol the
last family rehoused

western Addition Area 1

The Statistics:

A minority family
A father
5 children

18 relocation visits to the

family
16 weeks of searching for

housing
36 referrals to sales and

rental units by
8 real estate firms and

the Agency

The Situation:

The father served as the wage earner and single
head of the household. After the mortgage was
paid, not much money remained from the sale
of the house to the Agency. At least three bed-
rooms were needed for three daughters, two
sons, and the father. The father's modest in-
come as a hospital orderly provided the neces-
sities for his family and the expenses of one
daughter at the University of California. It did
not permit very large monthly mortgage install-
ments. The family preferred the Richmond Dis-
trict because of the schools.

This was the last remaining family in the first
Western Addition area, and the blighted struc-
ture could not be demolished until the family
was re-established in good housing within its
means.

The Solution:

On the 36th referral to relocation housing, the
father purchased a new home.

The Moral:

The Agency does not move a family until it has
suitable housing for it.

The Agency helped 1,329 families to
move in the Western Addition Area 1
program.

Of these, only two had to be evicted
for unwillingness to work with the
Agency.

100

Every family must
be offered decent,
safe, and sanitary
housing within
its financial means.

Enrlchtd tducatlon

Chfldftn in 1h* Luttning Conttr

of the WMttrn Addition John S«ftt

Eltmentlfy School haw • nt<*

fiptfltnco Thty If am to hitin

and to rt»d tlmultintouti,

Photo pU'I H Rifk

Should San Francisco's redevelopment program
be used to increase housing opportunities for
minority citizens?

No other public or private agency does the work,
pays the bill, and is as effective as is the Re-
development Agency in placing nonwhite fami-
lies and individuals in good, open-occupancy,
private housing.

The Redevelopment Agency operates under
Federal, State, and local laws which prohibit
discrimination in housing and facilities in rede-
velopment areas. The Agency seriously admin-
isters and enforces these legal requirements.

It is Agency policy to avoid the creation of new
ghettos and the expansion of existing ghettos.
Ghettos are attributable in part to low income,
in part to racial discrimination in housing.
Ghettos also result in part from the desires of
some members of minority groups to live in such
areas. The minorities' freedom of choice cannot

be abused by the Agency through a prohibition
on their selection of areas of residence. The
important objective is freedom of effective
choice over a broad range of locations.

The Agency has supplemented its rehousing pro-
gram with a referral service to assist families
and individuals with problems which prevent
them from obtaining good housing. (See preced-
ing topic in this report.)

The Agency clearly focuses its program upon
the fair and equitable treatment of people and
not solely upon the removal of slum structures
and the rebuilding of new structures. Every
family must be offered decent, safe, and sani-
tary housing within its financial means. No fam-
ily is moved until this can be done.

The Agency has been active in the development
of new tools and aids to reduce the costs of
housing. It has activated several demonstration
programs. It was one of the first in the United
States to utilize Federal legislation as soon as
it was enacted for the creation of moderate
priced private housing. It has proposed the use
of scattered public housing as a demonstration
in the second Western Addition area and con-
tinues to explore additional approaches.

I,

jobs, and taxes

Private investment figures are given
below for each of the areas currently
under redevelopment.

Does San Francisco
use its redevelopment
program to encourage
business investment,
create jobs, and
strengthen the
City's tax base?

Estimates oi Assessed values

in San Francisco's Redevelopment Areas c

Millions of Dollars]

Diamond
Heights

A 4
Bl 1.4

CI

Western A 2.8

Legend:

A prior to redevelopment
125.6 B ■ 195344 tax year

C ■ after completion of redevelopment

Golden
Gateway

3 areas
combined

190.0

San Francisco Redevelopment Agency

7

Estimated Private

Expenditures to

December 31, 1963

Western Addition Area 1
Diamond Heights
Golden Gateway

$19,231,000
7,824,000
9,051.000

Totals $36,106,000

Estimated Private
Expenditures at Completion
of Development

$ 70,000,000

76,000,000

210,000,000

$356,000,000

It is estimated that the private investment thus
far represents about 3,600 direct man-years of
construction work.

In addition to employment provided for the con-
struction activity, the redevelopment areas will
provide centers for continuing employment in
many varying fields. In the Golden Gateway, for
example, after redevelopment the commercial
space will accommodate an estimated 22,000
office workers and employees in retail busi-
nesses. In the first Western Addition area, which
is predominantly residential, there will be over
500 jobs in the commercial areas.

With development well under way in the three
redevelopment areas, it is now possible to deter-
mine more clearly the effect the redevelopment
process has on assessed values in redevelop-
ment areas. In Diamond Heights and Western
Addition Area 1, assessed values of the partially
completed improvements in the 1963-64 tax year

already exceed the assessed values of proper-
ties in these areas prior to redevelopment (see
chart above). The fact that the new improve-
ments were not further advanced in the Golden
Gateway on Tax Monday (March 4, 1963) in the
1963-64 tax year is the reason assessed values
were still low.

Construction

in progress,

St. Nicholas Orthodox

Church in

Diamond Heights

Architect:

William F. Hempel, AIA

Photo: Karl H. Riek

Diamond Heights, single family home

Developer: Leon Yudkm
Architect: Edward Wong. AIA

Preservation

oi views
and open spaces

How does San Francisco's redevelopment pro-
gram provide for preservation of views and open
spaces?

In a City where views are considered a priceless
asset, the Redevelopment Agency has a contin-
uing program of preserving views in redevelop-
ment areas In the Golden Gateway there will be
an open air easement above the second floor
level along Commercial Street. The vista down
Commercial Street to the Ferry Building, among
the most impressive in the City, will be pre-
served. Each residential block in the Golden
Gateway will have open spaces where landscap-
ing and works of art will enhance the views.

In the first Western Addition, vistas down
vacated streets are receiving special attention.
O'Farrell Street will have a plaza at the entrance
to St. Mark's Lutheran Church, and views west-
ward up the hill on O'Farrell Street will eitend
to the new St. Mary's Cathedral.

The interior-block play areas in St. Francis
Square are joined by a community plaza at the

former intersection of O'Farrell and Buchanan
Streets. The Peace Plaza with the Peace Pagoda
in the Japanese Cultural and Trade Center will
also be located on what was formerly Buchanan
Street.

In Diamond Heights the Agency encourages
developers on the downhill side of the streets to
build down the hill on their lots and limit build-
ing heights above the street level to preserve
the views from buildings on the uphill side of
the streets.

The Redevelopment Agency has followed the
pattern established by the San Francisco Plan-
ning Commission to encourage high-rise build-
ings on the crests of hills and low- and medium-
rise buildings in the valleys and low lying areas.
The Agency also encourages placing telephone
and electrical lines underground. The resulting
enhancement of views and increase in land
values more than offset the cost of underground
installations.

8

9

Yerba Buena Center:
are proposed.

Two theaters, a museum, and a sport arena

Plan: Livingston and Blayney, City and Regional Planners
Photo: Dwam Faubion

I

of entertainment and
cultural facilities

Is it possible for San Francisco to use its rede-
velopment program to create entertainment and
cultural facilities needed by the City?

A guiding principle behind redevelopment is to
make San Francisco an increasingly attractive
place in which to live, to work, and to visit.
Portions of the City under redevelopment are
being designed to provide services, amenities,
and such attractions as entertainment and cul-
tural facilities.

The Ferry Building Park will serve as the focal
point for the Golden Gateway and the east end
of Market Street. In the private development
facing this park, the Agency is considering with
interested developers the establishment of such
popular entertainment facilities as a cinema,
art gallery, outdoor cafe, restaurant, book store,
or music shop. In addition, efforts are under
way to provide land in or near the Ferry Building
Park area for San Francisco's nationally known
Actor's Workshop.

In the Japanese Cultural and Trade Center in the
Western Addition, there will be a Kabuki theater.

It is possible that the Yerba Buena Center may
include a cultural center with theaters, an art
museum, a sports arena, and an exhibit hall.

Achieving outstanding design

How does San Francisco's redevelopment pro-
gram encourage good design?

San Francisco is one of the few cities in the
country where the citizen senses the meaning
of urban design. To the San Franciscan, urban
design means keeping San Francisco a unique
and beautiful city.

The Redevelopment Agency knows that to make
neighborhoods pleasant places to live it is es-
sential that they be well designed. To rebuild
neighborhoods of superior design, the Redevel-
opment Agency has used many methods to bring
good designers together with responsible de-
velopers. Nation-wide competitions have been
held to select proposals for the Golden Gateway
residential and public garage areas and for the
22-acre top of Red Rock Hill in Diamond Heights.
Three high-rise structures were under way in
1963 of the competition-winning proposal for
the Golden Gateway. The first apartments of the
Red Rock Hill competition-winning proposal were
also completed.

Outstanding designers were retained by the
Redevelopment Agency to prepare designs for
the Diamond Heights Neighborhood Center, the
Nihonmachi, the Fillmore Center, landscaping in
Western Addition Area 2, and the Yerba Buena
Center.

Prospective developers for moderate-priced pri-
vate housing sites in the first Western Addition
area and Diamond Heights were asked to sub-
mit design proposals together with proposed
development costs and monthly charges. Thus,
design was a major factor in the Agency's choice
of developers for these sites.

It will be the continuing practice of the Agency
to strive for outstanding design in all renewed
areas. Only by achieving superior design for
each neighborhood and harmoniously relating
each neighborhood to the City as a whole can
the beauty of San Francisco be preserved.

Awards and citations

Progressive Architecture gave a citation for the
residential design being built by San Francisco
Redevelopers, Inc. for Red Rock Hill-architects
James K. Levorsen and Clyde B. Cohen, with Jack
Allen Charney in association.

Practical Builder accorded its "Design Award
House" to the Gall i Construction Company's
houses in Diamond Heights— architects Hayes
and Smith.

The Federal Housing Administration announced
an Award of Merit to St. Francis Square Coop-
erative Apartments in Western Addition Area 1.

The Building Industry Conference Board recog-
nized the Agency's program for redevelopment
and rehabilitation with its "Achievement Award
of the Year."

Oiamond Hiighli, *m|lr Ijm.ly homtt

Developer Gilli Conduction Company

Architects Hayes ind Smith. AIA

Drawing Noni Claary

Diamond Heights. Red Rock Hill Developer: San Francisco Redevelopers. Inc. Architects: James K. Levorsen and B. Clyde Cohen, with lack Allen Charne

.AIA
Bry

Marvin Becker

Diamond Heights
Mode rate- Priced Private Housing
Developer: Robert Chuckrow Construction Company
Architect: Nobler and Chen, AIA

Preservation ol outstanding structures ol the past

11

Does San Francisco's redevelopment program
provide for retention and preservation of build-
ings of esthetic and architectural merit?

It is standard Agency procedure to identify
structures of historical and architectural merit
for preservation and rehabilitation in redevelop-
ment areas.

The Agency has worked with the San Francisco
Conservation Committee to identify such struc-
tures located in the second Western Addition
area. The Committee's membership includes

representatives from the California Historical
Society, the American Institute of Architects,
the Society of Architectural Historians, the So-
ciety to Preserve Period Architecture, the San
Francisco Planning and Urban Renewal Associa-
tion, and the local press.

A visual and historical survey of the Yerba Buena
Center was conducted during 1963. As in the
second Western Addition area, significant build-
ings are being incorporated into the urban de-
sign proposal wherever possible.

Western Addition Area 2, south side of Bush Street between Fillmore and Webster Streets

Photo: Karl H. Riek

12

and neighborhood

To what extent does San Francisco use its
redevelopment program to make sites available
for the construction of schools, libraries,
churches, housing for the elderly, convalescent
hospitals, nursery schools, medical centers, and
park and recreation areas to serve the needs of
its citizens?

In the first Western Addition area a branch
library is scheduled to be built in 1964. The
Cathedral Parish Elementary School has been
completed, and construction will commence on
an addition to the Raphael Weill Elementary
School in 1964. Central Gardens (Hospital for
Convalescing), the first nursing home in the
nation built under the Federal Housing Admin-
istration program in an urban redevelopment
area, was completed and in use in 1963. Two
housing projects for the elderly moved through
the design and financing stages in 1963 and are
to be built in 1964.* A nursery school is also
planned for this redevelopment area. Medical
office buildings in the block south of Mt. Zion
Hospital were completed during 1963. A medical
office building for the Kaiser Foundation Hos-
pital is nearing completion and will be in use
in 1964. Design work for the new St Mary's
Cathedral started in 1963.

In Diamond Heights sites are designated for
elementary and secondary schools. The St.
Aidan's Episcopal Church was completed and in
use in 1963. The St. Nicholas Orthodox Church

began construction in 1963 and will be com-
pleted in 1964. The Missouri Synod Lutheran
Church is scheduled to begin construction in
1964.

Every redevelopment project provides for park
and recreation facilities made possible by City
funds, by public funds expended by the Agency,
or by private developers. Examples in the Golden
Gateway are the Ferry Building Park, the Sydney
G. Walton Square, and a two-block public plaza
atop the public garage; in the first Western
Addition the Hamilton Playground, the Raymond
S. Kimbell Playground, and the Peace Plaza of
the Japanese Cultural and Trade Center; and in
Diamond Heights the Douglass Playground, Fair-
mount Plaza, and the Walter A. Haas and George
Christopher recreation areas, in addition to one
of the City's major parks. Glen Canyon Park ol
112 acres.

* Tht Jontl Memorul Hemit. Inc , Droit ground tor con-
struction on Jlnulry H. 1M4.

SI NichoKl Orthodoi Church. Olimond Hoifhti

Architect w.i. urn F Hempel. AIA
Photo- Monrin Btcier

St. Aidin'i Epiicopil Church

Architect: Shidmore. Oainfl ind Merrill. AIA
Photo: Karl H. Rlth

Citizen

To what extent are citizens groups and indi-
viduals involved in the redevelopment program?

Much of this 1963 report has indicated the close
relationship that the Agency has had with indi-
viduals and groups at different levels and on
varying subjects.

It is not possible to enumerate the many meet-
ings and consultations and continuing relations
which the Agency has had with citizens during
1963. However, the list below includes the ma-
jor groups involved.

The press, radio, and television have been par-
ticularly helpful in bringing important redevel-
opment issues to the attention of the public.

American Friends Service Committee

American Institute of Architects, Northern California
Chapter

Apostleship of the Sea

Associated Home Builders, Inc.

Baptist Ministerial Alliance

Bay Area Rapid Transit District

Bay Area Urban League, Inc.

Bayview-Hunters Point Citizens Committee

Booker T. Washington Community Service Center

Building Owners and Managers Association

Canon Kip Community House

Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of San Francisco

Chinatown-North Beach Improvement Association

Community Service Organization

Council for Civic Unity of San Francisco

District Councils — Western Addition and Hunters Point

Down Town Association of San Francisco

Eureka District Merchants Association

Eureka Valley Promotion Association

Family Service Agency of San Francisco

Fillmore Merchants Development, Inc.

Fillmore Merchants and Improvement Association

Glen Park Property Owners Association, Inc.

The Golden Gate Neighborhood Centers' Association, Inc.

Goodwill Industries of San Francisco, Inc.

Greater Mission Citizens Council

Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance

International Institute of San Francisco

Japanese American Citizens League

Jewish Family Service Agency

League of California Cities

Life Line Mission

Market Street Development Project, Inc.

Mission Neighborhood Centers, Inc.

Mission Street Merchants Association

National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People

Potrero Boosters and Merchants Association

The Salvation Army

San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council

San Francisco Chamber of Commerce

San Francisco Conservation Committee

San Francisco Council of Churches

San Francisco Council of District Merchants Association

San Francisco Development Fund

San Francisco Greater Chinatown Community Service
Association

San Francisco Planning and Urban Renewal Association
(SPUR)

San Francisco Port Authority

San Francisco Program for the Aging

San Francisco Real Estate Board

San Francisco Unified School District

The Society of California Pioneers

Society of St. Vincent de Paul

South of Market Advisory Committee on Commercial and
Industrial Development

Southern Promotion Association

Telegraph Hill Neighborhood Association

Travelers Aid Society of San Francisco

United Committee for the Japanese Community

United Community Fund of San Francisco

United San Francisco Freedom Movement

Upper Market-Eureka Valley Development Association

Visiting Nurse Association of San Francisco

West of Twin Peaks Ministerial Alliance

Westside Health Center

Young Men's Christian Association of San Francisco

Young Women's Christian Association of San Francisco

Youth for Service

13

St Mary's Cathedral (preliminary design}

Architects: Pietro Bellutchi. Pier Luigi Nervi.

Angus McSweeney, Paul A. Ryan. and John Michael Lee, AIA

Photo: Stone and Steccati

western

ureal

The accelerated pace ol construction started
in 1962 has resulted in the completion of the
majority of the major residential, institutional,
and commercial buildings planned for the area.

The St. Francis Square Cooperative Apartments
consisting of 299 moderate-priced garden units
were completed, sold, and occupied by the end
of the year. The developers received an Archi-
tectural Award of Merit from the Federal Hous-
ing Administration for design excellence, and
the project was cited by Commissioner William
L. Slayton of the Urban Renewal Administration
as being "proof that good design need not be
expensive, that good urban design can be built
into projects designed for any income level."

Eichler Homes, Inc., completed and began rent-
ing a $4,300,000 apartment building of 150
units. The Eichler Laguna Heights development
of 60 units of low-rise apartments, representing
an investment of $2,220,000, is scheduled for
transfer to the tenants' cooperative in 1964.

Barton Western, Inc., completed and began sell-
ing units in its Midtown Park development con-
sisting of a group of 140 low-rise cooperative
apartments.

The Salvation Army Officers Training School
completed and is occupying its cadet dormitory.

The National Cash Register Office Building was
completed and occupied during 1963.

14

San Francisco's first cylindrical concrete tower,
the Carillon (102 cooperative apartments), was
approximately 30 percent complete.

The Central Gardens (Hospital for Convalescing)
was completed and in operation during 1963.
The Kaiser Foundation medical building and 400-
car garage will be in use early in 1964.

The Archdiocese of San Francisco revealed a
bold and original preliminary design for a new
St. Mary's Cathedral. The design was prepared
by a distinguished architectural team including
Pietro Belluschi and Pier Luigi Nervi and local
architects Angus McSweeney, Paul A. Ryan, and
John Michael Lee. The design team has worked
closely with the Agency's Advisory Panel con-
sisting of Thomas H. Creighton, Thomas D.
Church, and Richard O'Hanlon and the members
of the Agency's staff. The Cathedral site is
bounded by Geary, Gough, and Ellis Streets and
what was formerly Octavia Street in Western
Addition Area 1. The Cathedral features a great
shell structure which rises from a square base
over the nave and terminates 180 feet above
as a cross shape. The top of the structure will
extend to a height equivalent to 18 stories
above the platform and will be clearly visible
on the skyline from four directions. Large
stained glass panels will be lighted in such a
way as to be seen from the interior and exterior
of the Cathedral. The main entrance to the

Cathedral is from Geary Street. A new St. Vin-
cent's Girls School and a rectory are integrated
into the platform on the south side.

The many complex problems which have been
encountered in connection with the $15,000,000
Japanese Cultural and Trade Center have been
substantially solved, and construction of the
public parking garage below the Center should
start during the latter part of 1964.

By the end of the year, the Jones Memorial
Methodist Church had scheduled ground-
breaking for the construction of a 32 un it resi-
dential development for the elderly.*

Final activities were under way for construction
to begin on the Martin Luther Tower to provide
120 apartments for the elderly.

San Francisco "Firsts" in
Western Addition Area 1

St. Francis Square-the first application in the nation
for FHA insurance of moderate-priced private housing,
with mortgage funds at a submarket interest rate.

Central Gardens (Hospital for Convalescing)— the first
FHA-msured nursing home in an urban renewal area.

Jones Memorial Homes, Inc.-the first moderate-income
housing for the elderly financed by the Community
Facilities Administration in the West in an urban re-
newal area.

• Construction started January 19, 1964.

Developer: Barton-Western, Inc.

Architect: Skidmore. Owings and Merrill, AIA

Photo: Air News Photos

15

16

Diamond Heights

At the end of 1963 there were approximately
1,000 persons residing in Diamond Heights. By
the end of the year the new construction in this
area totaled 330 units completed or under
construction.

The final arrangements for the $3,500,000 com-
mercial center were made for construction early
in 1964.* Completion is scheduled for the sum-
mer of 1964. This will be a major neighborhood
center with a supermarket, a bank, a post office,
a pharmacy, and other shops for convenient
shopping in the area.

Adjoining the 4.6-acre commercial center will
be the George Christopher Recreation Center.
Funds were appropriated by the City to purchase
this site early in 1964.

Near the recreation center and the commercial
center a site will be sold to the School Board
for an elementary school in 1964. Preliminary
designs have been finished, and the financing
for the school will be presented to the voters
in 1964.

Construction was started in 1963 on two other
prominent sites for the St. Aidan's Episcopal
Church (completed and in use) and the St. Nich-
olas Orthodox Church.

The proposal to place 471 units of moderate-
priced private housing in this area was pre-
sented to the Board of Supervisors. (See page 2
of this report) In this connection the Agency
had a scale model built of the area showing the
housing and other developments built and to be
built in Diamond Heights.

* Construction started January 14, 1964, by San Francisco
Redevelopers, Inc.

Diamond Heifhts Shopping Cantor

Developer: San Francisco Redevelopers, Inc.

Architect: Jack Allen Charney. AIA

Progress was made for completing such other
public improvements as parks and recreation
areas. The firehouse site was in the process of
being sold to the City at the end of the year. At
the request of residents and developers, the
Municipal Railway extended bus service into the
area.

All preliminary work was accomplished for the
sale of sites on Fairmount Hill in this area early
in 1964.

Golden Gateway

During 1963 the Agency acquired the last pri-
vately owned property in the Golden Gateway.
The disposition program moved ahead with the
sales offering of three blocks of prime com-
mercial land in the area south of Clay Street
Negotiations were under way in 1963 with inter-
ested parties for the two-block parcel facing the
Ferry Building Park area and the block south of
Clay Street between Battery and Front Streets.

The first phase of the Perini-San Francisco
Associates residential development of 794 units
was sufficiently completed to open a rental of-
fice on the site.

During 1963 an eight-year effort to formulate a
suitable arrangement for the produce industry
came to a happy ending. Ground was broken for

the $4.5 million San Francisco Produce Terminal
at Islais Creek on February 4, 1963, which was
occupied and in operation on September 25,
1963. The new market consists of 80 produce
stalls, four restaurants, a service station, and
a bank and office building. The financing and
construction of this market was made possible
through the close cooperation of the majority
of the merchants, the City, the Department of
Public Works, the S.F. Development Company,
and the Redevelopment Agency. The new facili-
ties are extremely efficient, clean, and free from
the traffic congestion of trucks and cars that
existed in the old produce area. The merchants
in the new produce market have indicated an
increase in business of as much as 25 to 35
percent since moving from the old location,
while working hours have been shortened
through more efficient operations.

With the satisfactory relocation of the produce
industry, demolition moved ahead on the unoc-
cupied buildings. By the end of the year 76
percent of the total demolition scheduled for
this area was completed.

During 1963 the schematic plans for the design
of the Ferry Building Park were made by the
consultants, Lawrence Halprin, John S. Bolles,
and Mario J. Ciampi.

Produce
Market
Trade Up

25% Bootl in
New Location

marSM hni inrfiml U ta
SS s«r CMI tine* Um mo**
la UM m* UUu Cra«h km
linn, Frank Lm. nnvtr
*l*f1*e f t • 1 1 4 a * I M UM

MM) rnatnrnrr

Ntf mm Imi VwiifuM In
rrannno na MM but narocM
UM nMfnWri )UM rananlal
.n| thrM NM«lhj ftf antra

enrol rpa,,n««,

LrM Mid thai tha nx>
nrMtwrn terminal M UM lara
n In Dm

San Francisco Eieminer,
December 23. 1963

Ferry Bulldlnf Park
Drawing: John Evans

The Fillmore Center

Consultant Architects • Engineers-
Reid, Rockwell, Banwell and Tarics

Western Addition
Area 2

The Redevelopment Plan for the 73-block por-
tion of the Western Addition surrounding and
complementing Western Addition Area 1 was
submitted early in 1963 to the U.S. Housing and
Home Finance Agency for review and approval
and the allocation of loan and grant funds to
accomplish the plans. Informal approval of the
renewal plans had been received by the end of
the year.*

To acquaint the residents, business operators,
and property owners in the area with the pro-
posed Redevelopment Plan, a site office was
opened in December 1962. During 1963 staff
members assigned to this site office have con-
tacted residents both in the site office and
through door-to-door calls in the area. Contin-
uing contacts have also been established with
businesses, churches, institutions, and other
area organizations. These contacts have been
geared to determining the needs and desires of
residents and organizations in the area and to
working out the nature and extent of their par-
ticipation in the renewal of the area.

In addition, the site office staff has worked
closely with property owners wishing to reha-
bilitate their properties and with developers
proposing new construction to assure that any
work done would not be in conflict with pro-
posed land uses and development standards
under consideration for the area. The Agency
continued its work with interested sponsors of
moderate-priced private housing and housing
for senior citizens but could not proceed to plan
specific sites until approval of the Western
Addition Area 2 Plan by the Board of Supervisors.

Consultation during preparation of the Redevel-
opment Plan and continuing cooperation have
resulted in active progress by two groups in the

area toward participation in the renewal of two
important sections of the area. Members of the
Fillmore Merchants and Improvement Associa-
tion and interested property owners formed a
corporation for the purpose of being able to
undertake the development of the new Fillmore
Center, the commercial heart of the area. Simi-
larly, the United Committee for the Japanese
Community undertook formation of a corpora-
tion to be able to undertake coordinated renewal
of the Nihonmachi— Japanese Town— historically
a vital and interesting part of the Western
Addition.

In cooperation with the San Francisco Housing
Authority staff, work has been done in the
selection of possible sites for scattered public
housing proposed for development in the area.
This proposed experiment is designed to avoid
the concentration of public housing in large-
scale developments.

Proposals for the physical renewal of the area
and relocation of residents and businesses were
presented publicly to the San Francisco Plan-
ning and Urban Renewal Association (SPUR) and
the Western Addition District Council. Support
of the proposed redevelopment has been given
by such major groups as SPUR, the Fillmore
Merchants and Improvement Association, the
United Committee for the Japanese Community,
and the Golden Gate Neighborhood Centers'
Association.

All processing preliminary to formal considera-
tion and action on the proposed redevelopment
proposals was completed or nearing completion
at the end of the year. Public hearings will be
held by the Redevelopment Agency early in 1964.
Following these hearings and action by the
Agency the proposals for redevelopment of Area
2 will be submitted to the Board of Supervisors
for its consideration, public hearings, and
appropriate action.

* Formal approval received January 29, 1964.

17

Verba Buena Center* is

Planning for the Yerba Buena Center area had
progressed well on schedule at the end of 1963.
The Redevelopment Plan for this area will be
presented for review by the people of San Fran-
cisco, the Planning Commission, and the Board
of Supervisors in 1964.

By the close of 1963 the direction of planning
encompassed a reuse with office buildings, busi-
ness service activities, etc. Also proposed were
such new uses as commercial theaters, a mu-
seum, exhibition space, and sports center if it
becomes possible to establish such new
activities.

A system of malls and pedestrian bridges will
link the redeveloped area to the central busi-
ness district, a revitalized Market Street, and
the multimillion-dollar rapid transit system. Sur-
rounding the cultural center core, the proposal
provides for 2,000,000 gross square feet of of-
fice space. Parking areas will be provided under
and adjacent to the office structures and the
cultural center. In addition, the proposal con-
tains plans for devoting approximately 25 per-
cent of the land area to light industrial and
related uses in the southern portion of the area.
This is approximately the same proportion of
the area presently devoted to these uses.

A major part of the planning work on the area
has related to relocation of families, individu-
als, and businesses. The relocation program for
the area is feasible over the projected three-
year period of 1965 to 1968.

The success of the proposal depends upon the
continued and increased interest of community
leaders. Also its success will require the solu-
tion of many problems, the most serious of
which is financing of the cultural activities. If
other cities can solve such problems, so can
San Francisco.

* Formerly South of Market Redevelopment Area. Name
changed February 20, 1964.

A railed plaza provide! a dramatic tettlnf for office! and cultural lacllltits.

Plani Livintiton and Blayney, City and Regional Plant
Photo. Dwam faul

Hunters Point

Since 1961 the Agency has been working closely
with City departments and agencies and the
Federal Government to prepare a proposal for
developing the Hunters Point temporary war
housing area. Because the area has already re-
ceived substantial Federal benefits, the major
portion of the new program will be financed by
a Federal loan, as distinguished from the usual
loan and grant for redevelopment projects. At
the end of the year, the Board of Supervisors
approved the submission of an application to
the Federal Government for funds to plan a
project in this area.

The preparation of the application involved not
only public agencies but was reviewed step by
step with the Bayview-Hunters Point Citizens
Committee. When the planning begins for this
project, the Agency will continue to work with
the citizens in the area.

In view of the 1970 deadline established by
State law for the demolition of the temporary
war housing and the substandard condition of
the housing, the entire war housing area will be
cleared for redevelopment. The area will be
rebuilt principally for moderate-priced private
housing, with approximately 1,700 such units
proposed. The remaining 600 units proposed for
the area will be for housing in other price
ranges. This proposed reuse is based on the
Board of Supervisors' directive to the Agency
to redevelop the area to the maximum extent
for housing for families of moderate income.

The State Highway Commission adopted a route
for the Hunters Point Freeway favored by the
Bayview-Hunters Point residents and City agen-
cies. This decision will make it possible to de-
velop a sound, well-planned neighborhood in
this area, undamaged by the effect of a major
freeway bisecting the community.

19

Rapid
Transit
corridor study

Bay Area voters have approved bonds to build
a high-speed public rapid transit system con-
necting San Francisco with the East Bay. The
system— to be the most efficient and up-to-date
in the world— will cost almost $1 billion. In San
Francisco the rapid transit trains will operate
mostly subsurface, and major routes of this
rapid transit system will be located along Mar-
ket and Mission Streets. Construction is sched-
uled to start in San Francisco in 1965, and the
total system is scheduled for completion in
1969.

At the request of the Board of Supervisors, the
Redevelopment Agency and the Department of
City Planning formulated a proposed study-
called the Rapid Transit Corridor Study— to ana-
lyze the influence of the rapid transit system
on adjacent neighborhoods and to achieve maxi-
mum benefits from the rapid transit improve-
ments. After full community discussion, the
Board of Supervisors approved submittal of an
application to the Federal Government for funds
for the study in December 1963. Funds for the
study should be made available during 1964.

The essential character of the undertaking is
that of a study, as distinguished from an urban
renewal or redevelopment project. One purpose
of the study is to identify areas within the
Corridor area wherein renewal action might be

desirable, to identify the nature of such renewal,
and to schedule a specific program for presen-
tation to the Board of Supervisors. Because of
the general quality of the Rapid Transit Cor-
ridor area, emphasis will be on massive reten-
tion rather than clearance of structures. The
study is designed to find new ways to stop the
spread of blight before neighborhoods dete-
riorate to the point where slum clearance is
necessary.

Recommendations of the study will be developed
in close consultation with the involved neigh-
borhood organizations to take fully into account
the needs and desires of local citizens. Any
action program which might he recommended
as a result of the study will be subject to neigh-
borhood discussion and public hearings before
presentation to the Board of Supervisors. The
study will make recommendations on how the
City and neighborhood organizations can work
together for better neighborhoods and a better
community.

20

proiected F»nBnnnures ami Project Financins [ooo si

• Cash carry-over from Diamond Heigits

^H

M

''■!C

The San Francisco Redevelopment Agency is an instrumentality of
the State of California. It works on behalf of and under the policy
direction of the City and County of San Francisco. It uses for this
purpose Federal funds received from the Housing and Home Fi-
nance Agency's Urban Renewal Administration and local contribu-
tions, mostly in the form of public works and facilities.

City and County
of San Francisco

Mayor John F. Shelley

Board of Supervisors

John J. Ferdon, President
William C. Blake
Roger Boas
Joseph M. Casey
Dr. Charles A. Ertola
Leo McCarthy
Clarissa Shortall McMahon
George R. Moscone
Jack Morrison
Peter Tamaras
Joseph E. Tinney

May 11, 1964

San Francisco
Redevelopment Agency

Everett Griffin, Chairman

Walter F. Kaplan, Vice Chairman

James B. Black, Jr.

i-v u James A. Folger

"\ Lawrence R. Palacios

M. Justin Herman
Executive Director

Design: William Reid: Typography: Reardon & Krebs; Lithos'aphy: East Wind Printers